Slashdot Mirror
Americans Plan Massive 'Net Neutrality' Protest Next Week (theguardian.com)
An anonymous reader quotes the Guardian:
A coalition of activists, consumer groups and writers are calling on supporters to attend the next meeting of the Federal Communications Commission on September 26 in Washington DC. The next day, the protest will move to Capitol Hill, where people will meet legislators to express their concerns about an FCC proposal to rewrite the rules governing the internet... The activist groups are encouraging internet users to meet their lawmakers and tell them how a free and open internet is vital to their lives and their livelihoods...
"The FCC seems dead set on killing net neutrality, but they have to answer to Congress, and Congress has to answer to us, their constituents," said Evan Greer, campaign director for Fight for the Future, one of the protest's organisers. "With this day of advocacy, we're harnessing the power of the web to make it possible for ordinary internet users to meet directly with their senators and representatives to tell their stories, and make sure that lawmakers hear from the public, not just lobbyists for AT&T and Verizon," she said.
Monday Mozilla and the Internet Archive are also inviting the public to a free panel discussion featuring former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler on ways the American public can act to preserve net neutrality.
"The FCC seems dead set on killing net neutrality, but they have to answer to Congress, and Congress has to answer to us, their constituents," said Evan Greer, campaign director for Fight for the Future, one of the protest's organisers. "With this day of advocacy, we're harnessing the power of the web to make it possible for ordinary internet users to meet directly with their senators and representatives to tell their stories, and make sure that lawmakers hear from the public, not just lobbyists for AT&T and Verizon," she said.
Monday Mozilla and the Internet Archive are also inviting the public to a free panel discussion featuring former FCC Chairman Tom Wheeler on ways the American public can act to preserve net neutrality.
No WE don't. Some of us realize the hypocrisy of this movement - and this article.
And current ISPs will make sure that the competition is erased due to legal obstacles concerning patents and exclusive agreements with towns.
If builders built buildings the way programmers wrote programs, then the first woodpecker would destroy civilization.
"and Congress has to answer to us, their constituents,"
That's the funniest thing I've ever read...
Since most people haven't even heard about it. I learned about it reading this headline. It'll be massive like Trump's inauguration.
What we really need is to set our devices to operate in mesh network mode. Where is Google and Apple in this?
to hit DC
This article is a barely disguised advertisement of the event. Guardian's "journalists" are making this story instead of merely reporting it....
Strangely enough, no one complains about this incident of foreign meddling in the America's political process.
In Soviet Washington the swamp drains you.
The problem is the ISP and the communication Infrastructure are one and the same.
Back during the dial-up days, we had hundreds of ISPs in a single aria code, while AOL was the king, they were many ISPs who could provide internet access as well. Most of them were BBSs who added SLIP and/or PPP access.
But this meant that if you wanted to connect to the internet you had 2 bills. Your phone line bill which pays for for the infrastructure, and your ISP where it was the gateway to the Internet.
Now with broadband, as a necessary standard we normally pay a company who controls the wires and the service. In rural areas you may have only one choice usually Cable or DSL. But once you get the communication infrastructure you also have to rely on the whims of the same company for hosting the ISP.
Now governments local, state and federal have a slew of laws around these, because this infrastructure is rather invasive. Running across private property. So even if you were to start you own company you will still need to be politically involved to try to get these laws changed so you can be allowed to distribute your service to your customer base.
This isn't about being whiny liberals, (as the conservatives whine complain and demand they must be treated like special snowflakes on different topics) but needing to protest a system that isn't treating the public fairly.
Yes political protesters tend to come with stupid arguments and often over simplify the problem. But it difficult to post a 300 page thesis on the complexity of the problems, vs just saying AT&T is trying to kill your you tube Chanel.
If something is so important that you feel the need to post it on the internet... It probably isn't that important.
Define "Massive" You keep using that word, and I'm not sure you know what it means.
Sent from my TARDIS
And yet we have competitors for both in most European countries.
In some European countries, we have whole-sellers available to offer the connectivity to ISPs, some of it brought by business interests, other by law.
A problem that also exists in Europe. However, it's been over come in most instances.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
Yeah, 20 years ago we didn't have ISP's peering with the content networks and had to rely on dozens of middle tier networks and lots of latency making streaming video virtually impossible.
Those were the days
"...they have to answer to Congress, and Congress has to answer to us, their constituents,"
Before you go spouting off regarding who answers to whom, remember just how much people don't give a shit about Rights anymore. Just last week, Millennial's confirmed they would gladly give up their Right to Vote in exchange for getting some college debt relief.
I am not against net neutrality per se. I am against Internet companies lying that they will provide me certain data rates, when in fact behind the scenes they are extorting a part of my Netflix fee, in essence making me pay more to them than the agreed-upon amount.
And no, hiding it in fine print, hoping people don't realize, is fraud.
(-1: Post disagrees with my already-settled worldview) is not a valid mod option.
>> Massive 'Net Neutrality' Protest Next Week
Are you sure? Usually we need a little more advance notice to do that for you.
>> ordinary internet users to meet directly with their senators and representatives to tell their stories
I don't think I've heard the phrase "internet users" in about 20 years. You might find that most people already in touch with their reps are already on the Internet, but sure, let's see what you dig up!
Since when do they need to answer to the public? And I do not mean where it is written when they should, but since when they actually do it and what the consequences are in reality when they don't do that.
Because what I now see is that there is no accountability. They are being re-elected, so there is no reason for them to listen.
It is like saying to kids they are not allowed to take a cookie and they do it. If there are no consequences, they will take another one. You can moan and yell and be upset and point at the house rules and say to wait till daddy comes home and put out the jumper cables, but as long as nothing happens and the kids know nothing will happen, it is just stress for you and more cookies for the kids.
Don't fight for your country, if your country does not fight for you.
"they have to answer to Congress, and Congress has to answer to us" HAHAHAHHA what fantasy world do YOU live in? Once they get to DC, they could give crap about anyone. It's a little club...once you are invited in, and play along with their rules, you are there FOR LIFE, and become rich beyond your wildest dreams!
Don't ruin the internet for the rest of the world either, FCC.
Requiem for the American Dream
Those were the days
They really were.
Wanna buy a shirt?
https://www.redbubble.com/people/stealthfinger/shop?asc=u
I thought the jugalos were a few days ago.
Americans Plan Massive 'Net Neutrality' Protest Next Week
Don't people normally protest against an action or idea? If they support a given cause, it's usually called a rally.
A recursive sig
Can impart wisdom and truth
Call proc signature()
And you think it would be different without net neutrality? Without, you get that on top of corporations censoring and shaping to their benefit.
If anything, we need true net neutrality. All and any content must be delivered by those that transport it without any kind of discrimination. Only the endpoints may decide to disallow any kind of content to stem from them or be delivered to them.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.
Even if the censorship legislation were to be removed, it doesn't prevent the beneficiaries of Net Neutrality from censoring content THEY don't like. Ultimately, Net Neutrality is a redistribution of power.
I have a solution. The infrastructure "generally" belongs to the ISPs, right? I'm on board with personal freedom, so I tend to side with property owners to do with their property as they will. Yes, I know that would suck for the customers, but I have a solution for that...
Congress pass a law which allows privately held ISPs to filter and shape traffic however they will. Same bill would explicitly allow city/county/state/fed entities to setup their own infrastructure AND create a federal fund that these entities can apply for to help build out their own infrastructure. ISPs would be barred from making any changes for 5-10 years, during which time they pay a new tax into the "build out" fund.
Private property is private property, and no one should be forced to restrict their use of such. So we make the infrastructure public, and introduce serious competition into the market. :D
Mod me down with all of your hatred and your journey towards the dark side will be complete!
Unlawful means "Not explicitly written in law", not illegal
That's both a strawman argument and false semantics, to boot. "Unlawful" means "not permitted by law", like copyright infringment or child pornography. Under your misinterpretation, copyright infringement and child pornography would have no laws covering them, which is obviously both stupid and wrong. However, that aside there is no such clause in Net neutrality legislation in the US. You are spouting completely fabricated nonsense, and almost certainly a shill.
Have any of you fucking morons read and understood it?
In your case, the answer is at least 50% "No". You can read the final form of the US legislation here, and a quick search will indicate the phrase "hate speech" is not mentioned, not even once.
Go away, you pathetic treacherous little shill.
European [...] European [...] Europe
How many refugees from the U.S. and Canadian ISP regimes are European countries ready to accept?
It's not that I don't think the ISPs should notbe given control of the internet. The ISPs have shown that they shouldn't be given control by their bad behaviour.
I'm just not so interested in fighting the ISPs so that Google can control the internet.
----
The greatest trick of Google was proving to the world that it was not evil.
Syntax error: not enough Europes.
If that were actually an option for most people, there wouldn't really be a net neutrality push. The problem is that there isn't really such an option for too many people, unless you're counting "don't have an internet connection" as an option.
What percentage of the population understands what net neutrality is and what percentage of those people are big enough activists to protest?
Your problem isn't net neutrality but your politicians. Throw them away and start anew.
We used to have a Bill of Rights. Now, with the rights gone, all we have left is the bill.